Why Independent Labels and Artists Get A Raw Deal from Digital Music Services (There Is An Alternative)

18/01/2012

The Way We Were
Promoting music has never been straightforward and people have always tried to game the system – radio pluggers being the obvious example in the age of vinyl records where radio airtime determined a song’s success or failure. But the structure of the industry was well-understood and the relationships between the players and, more crucially, their economic interests were aligned.

Digital Confusion
Now, with the rise of digital music, it’s different – some bands achieving considerable success without a label (OK Go’s Damian Kulash wrote about this in the Wall Street Journal) others giving their music away (e.g. Nine Inch Nails). Even major bands, including Radiohead with the ‘In Rainbows’ album, have experimented with a ‘Pay What You Want’ approach – although it was not successful enough for Radiohead to use it for subsequent albums.

A Tale of Three Artists (and Labels)
Out of this confusion it’s possible to discern three different outcomes for artists and, to some extent, labels.

      The Major Artist
      Major artists signed to major labels (Sony, Universal, EMI, Warner) can rely on their pre-existing reputation and following and/or the marketing effort of their label to gain mindshare among music fans. They monetize this through gigs (see this latest excellent Economist piece in a series on the economics of live music), conventional CD sales, digital downloads and subscription streaming services. Moreover, focussing on spend per consumer rather than revenue per track, the streaming music services have started to close the gap with iTunes in the revenues they routinely return to the major labels. This is an arrangement that can work well for both major label and major artist, especially if the latter is the author as well the performer of the music.
      The Emergent Artist
      Online services such as Bandcamp, ReverbNation, HypeMachine, SoundClick or SoundCloud serve emergent artists very well. Their primary objective is to gain the exposure that will translate into traffic to their own websites, sales of gig tickets and growth in their fan base. Monetizing their music is nowhere near as important as getting people to listen to it, like it and share that enthusiasm with other people.
      The Squeezed Independent (and Authors and Others)
      Independent artists and labels sit squarely in the middle of these and face a dilemma. They need their content to be available on streaming services so that millions of users can access it but they get little collateral marketing benefit, have to deal with opaque accounting and suffer poor pay-out rates. Yet they need to make their music available on Spotify or Deezer in order to maximise the chances of discovery by new fans. Even then there’s a further dilemma since a subscriber to an ‘all you can eat’ streaming service is unlikely to make the additional outlay to purchase a download when they can listen to the music as often as they like through the streaming service (especially if it offers offline caching on mobile devices).
      Independent artists don’t always have the fan base to fill a major gig venue so their live performance options are limited and generate poor returns. For the majority of independent artists, paid download of whole tracks and CD sales remain the principal ways they earn a living and online music service need to be complementary to these and not risk cannibalising them.
      The increasing focus of the subscription streaming services (and major labels) on revenue per user, rather than revenue per track played, disenfranchises everyone involved in the track except the label itself and, perhaps, the featured artist (though there’s even dissent there). Publishers and authors (i.e. composers and lyricists), managers, session musicians and anyone else involved in creating a song and turning it into a recording, rely on the revenue per track played to earn their livelihoods and revenue per user undermines these economics.

An Open and Transparent Digital Music Service
Now Psonar wasn’t created to right the wrongs of the music industry but its simple and transparent business model is good for both fans and artists & labels.

For fans, Psonar Pay-Per-Play offers easy, selective access to streaming music on a per-track, ‘pay as you go’, value-for-money basis. They can pay via mobile phone (pre-pay or contract), credit card or PayPal. They can also share music on Facebook, Twitter, blogs or email, where other people can pay to play the music shared. Fans can also gift plays via Facebook Messaging, Twitter DM, SMS or email having pre-paid for another person to listen.

For artists and labels, Psonar Pay-Per-Play has a single, straightforward tariff that’s the same for all distributors or labels, as well as clear and transparent accounting where every stream is monetized apart from promotional activity. Psonar offers labels the tools to build highly social, viral promotion campaigns that don’t involve unlimited free access to music and which can be fine-tuned to generate revenue or promote viral spread (or both) as the label judges best. Since all monetization is per track streamed, everyone with an economic interest in the music earns their share of the revenue generated.

Psonar is the digital music service that reaches the ‘mobile music generation’ – digital natives unwilling or unable to pay for subscription streaming – with rich, social features that allow artists and labels to seed the viral spread of new music confident about monetization, transparency and pay-out levels.


Why Psonar Really Is Revolutionary (and Social)

31/12/2011

Over the past few months in selling the key ideas behind Psonar to labels and music industry pundits I’ve often been pushed back with the argument ‘what’s so different about Psonar – it’s just Spotify with a different payment model’. At first glance, Psonar does offer the same as Spotify – on-demand per track music streaming – but with Pay-Per-Play as the basis of charging rather than a limited amount of free, ad-supported use or a range of monthly subscriptions. But that misses the point – it’s all about being truly social.

Psonar iPhone App

Psonar iPhone App


From the music fan perspective, Psonar has a simple payment model that’s available to teenagers (tagged as ‘Digital Natives’ by Mark Mulligan in this Forrester Report in January 2011) and other people without credit cards. It can revolutionise streaming music access in the same way that ‘Pay As You Go’ revolutionised mobile phone access. More importantly, Psonar empowers peoples’ desire to share music – create a playlist in the Psonar app and gift it to anyone else to listen. The recipient only has to click on a link and the Psonar web app will immediately play on their smartphone, tablet or computer with no need to sign-up or sign-in. The donor pays 1p / 1c / 1 eurocent for each track gifted – so 10p for a 10 track playlist – and can pay through their phone bill (contract or pre-pay), credit card or PayPal.

For artists and labels, Psonar opens up a whole new world of viral and social marketing. By gifting plays to their fans, artists encourage them to spread the music on to their friends in turn. And fans are rewarded for sharing: 1 free play for every 10 Pay-Per-Play tracks played as a result of their gifting or sharing activity. Psonar play links can be embedded in tweets, Facebook updates, emails, texts, IM messages, blog posts and on artists’ and labels’ websites or Facebook pages. Psonar play links can be configured to allow different fan behaviour, such as play once or many times or allow gifting to one person or many people. This flexibility gives artists and labels, especially independents, the power to create a viral marketing campaign that’s tailored to the demographics and behaviour of their fans. Importantly, they can limit the number of plays that are free – knowing that any further spread monetizes on a Pay-Per-Play basis.

No-one can doubt the challenge we face in launching and growing Psonar. We’ve been lucky that some important players in the global music industry (The Orchard, INgrooves, Essential Music, Virtual Label, Skint/Loaded, Stealth Records to name a few), especially in the independent music sector, appreciate our vision and have partnered with us. At the start of the year when Congress will decide whether to pass the most draconian anti-piracy measure yet contemplated to protect copyright, SOPA, Psonar is about liberating the potential of the web to spread music and encourage listening in a way that rewards creators: to misquote Bill Cinton “it’s all about being social, stupid”.


Why Digital Music Services Must Come Clean about Payments

03/11/2011

Streaming music services have got off to a bad start with artists and other rights holders (composers, publishers etc).  Several failed long before making any meaningful pay-outs to rights holders (e.g. Spiral Frog, Imeem), some were taken over before they could prove their business models and pay anything out (e.g. Lala) and those that have apparently been successful are criticised for the paucity of payments made (e.g. Spotify, Deezer or even YouTube).

Uniform Motion logo

Uniform Motion published their pay-out rates

There’s been a long-running spat between songwriters and Spotify over pay-out rates, triggered by a 2009 blog post which extracted data from the Swedish performing rights society (STIM) to show that Lady Gaga had received $167 payment as co-composer of ‘Poker Face’  (this doesn’t include any payment to her as performer, which would have been channelled through the label as master rights holder) from 1,000,000 plays of the song.  Whatever the rights and wrongs of whether this is a fair or reasonable level of payment to a composer, the issue is symptomatic of significant disquiet among songwriters.  In a BBC interview in 2010, Patrick Rackow, chairman of The British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors (Basca), commented “At the moment, the amounts of money that are actually being received are tiny.  That might be because there is no money there. But there is no clear trail that can be established so that the songwriter can trace back what they ought to have got. These things are behind a blanket of secrecy, and that is extremely worrying.”

The songwriters have been joined by some high profile artists as well, including Coldplay according to an article in Friday’s Independent which stated that the band had refused to make ‘Mylo Xyloto’, its latest album, available on Spotify.  The article went on to say that the band had given no reason for its refusal but that EMI, Coldplay’s label, were “embarrassed” by the refusal, since it is a 2% shareholder in Spotify.

Whatever the merits and demerits of any particular digital music service whether it’s based on download like iTunes and Amazon, streaming like Napster and Spotify or an internet radio service like We7 or Pandora, it’s clearly sub-optimal to lose the confidence of artists and songwriters.  Nothing corrodes that confidence like secrecy and a lack of transparency which imply that the parties to a deal have something to hide. Which goes a long way to explain the chorus of agreement and dismay when Uniform Motion published their Spotify pay-out rates (and the rates they get from all other music sales channels) on Gizmodo.

At Psonar, we have a single tariff structure that is transparent to all and the same for all parties determined only by their role in creating, publishing and distributing that music.  Artists can see clearly how much the label, distributor and service provider itself (i.e. Psonar) is getting from each play of a track and since there is no industry ownership of Psonar there is no scope for a conflict of interests to arise.


Iceland’s in the Stream!

27/10/2009

I was lucky enough to be in Iceland for the recent Airwaves music festival. It rocked.

But whilst I was there I was away from my beloved laptop and iPod for a lot of the time. So no portable music library for me, or that would’ve been the case had psonar.com not launched their streaming service a few days ago.

You can now listen to your own music collection from anywhere in the world, regardless of the location of your own music playing devices and we think that’s pretty neat, even if we did make it happen ourselves. Well, I say we, but it was entirely the work of our very clever technical team of Rich, Tim and Ben.

Just how useful this was bought home on two occasions last week. The first came when I was enjoying a few drinks at a party on my first night in Reykjavik. The music being played was dreadful so I took custody of the laptop, logged onto my psonar.com account and started streaming some of my own music collection straight away.

Some might argue that this offered scant improvement on the quality of music but at least there was now a choice of several thousand tracks, rather than whatever can be dug up (and is licensed for listening in Iceland) on Youtube, Last FM, Myspace etc. My friends had a good laugh at my extensive classic rock collection and eventually settled on some FM Belfast, an enthralling Icelandic band who were performing at that weekend’s festival.

The second occasion was when we received an email from a lady who’d read about psonar.com and wanted to know if we could help back-up and retrieve her iPod music library. Her laptop had been stolen by some NEDs and she was left with just a device full of music that she didn’t want to lose (it wouldn’t download the collection onto a new laptop due to rights issues).

Thankfully, we could help: she installed the SongShifter app – downloaded from psonar.com – and it indentified the music on her iPod and then uploaded the whole lot to our cloud servers. She can now do what she likes with her music, including populating her new laptop with her own rescued music library.

So there you go, we’re there; you can have your music, your way, anytime. It works in any country in the world, even when you’re only a glacier or two away from the Arctic Circle, and it thwarts thieving hoodies.

Beat that Spotify.


Fishing for Success in the New Music Business

24/08/2009

As a rapidly-expanding company – and I’m not referring to the consequences of consuming the excellent home-made ham and cheese doorsteps served up by the CEO last Friday lunchtime – we’re always looking for ways to help propel Psonar into a steady orbit above other online music service providers and my job is to help communicate these new developments, and the benefits of using the site in general, to the outside world.

This is pretty exciting and interesting for me personally. I’ve been involved in the music industry since I started writing reviews for my University magazine (I quite liked the look of the Editor and the media types always had the best parties. I subsequently took the profession seriously and have written for The Guardian and Daily Express plus dozens of magazines, newspapers and websites around the world) and it recently occurred to me that technology-based music services like Psonar, Spotify, iTunes and Last.FM are the music industry now. The labels are floundering in their wake like a hungry marlin snapping at an impossibly bright and attractive lure whilst pioneers, like the team here, devise new and forward-thinking ways to make listening to music easier, all the time staying a step ahead of the slow-moving record industry.

And that’s what it’s all about – the crux of the digital revolution is convenience and ease of access. You can carry a library of music in your smallest jacket pocket that would’ve required a whole truck-load of CDs or vinyl to replicate some years ago and in a matter of seconds you can find and download virtually any piece of music or podcast you could care to imagine. This has allowed music to invade people’s lives like never before. Indeed, upload your collection to the Psonar Cloud and you’ve got it saved (and available to stream) indefinitely and available to listen to in any location around the world: no more lost music when your iPod gets stolen or a hard-drive dies. Now that’s real convenience.

But one of the things that confounds and amazes me is that the music industry is one of the few commercialised art forms where the quality of the basic end product isn’t dependent on the price. For example, if I wanted to own a truly special painting then I’d need to start adding a few zeros onto my credit card limit, or if I wanted to go and see a world-class opera then I’d also have to spend a lot of money, but if I want to own Led Zeppelin IV then it costs the same as a copy of PartyTime by The Cheeky Girls. Led Zeppelin IV contains Stairway To Heaven – one of modern music’s great compositions – whilst PartyTime contains Cheeky Song (Touch My Bum), which is an all-time low point in the history of recorded music.

Led Zeppelin IV - the same price as a Cheeky Girls album...

But this is what makes the art form, for me, anyway, completely compelling – the musical equivalent of a Picasso or Van Gogh is as accessible and costs the same as the musical equivalent of a two-year old’s first painting experiment. There are no boundaries or exclusions based on price, class or taste in modern music and digital services like Psonar are simply building on the most democratic of art forms in making purchasing, accessing and storing music easier and easier.

Finally, some news: since officially launching last week, the clever little Psonar SongShifter has found over 100,000 songs on users computers and devices and, of these, over 15,000 now reside securely in the Psonar Cloud. New tracks are being added at the rate of more than one-and-a-half songs a minute and the number will grow exponentially as more and more users join the Psonar community. We thank you for your help and participation from the bottom or our increasingly-ample frames (the CEO bought us all fish and chips for lunch today…).


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: